Budget Travel: Sites Under Attack by Critics Citing Reviews Are Fake

Saturday

Nov 24, 2012 at 5:14 AM

Having launched a major, months-long campaign designed to challenge the reliability of TripAdvisor.com, a British reputation management company called KwikChex has now moved against still another travel website that relies almost solely on so-called user-generated content.

By ARTHUR FROMMERWWW.FROMMERS.COM

Having launched a major, months-long campaign designed to challenge the reliability of TripAdvisor.com, a British reputation management company called KwikChex has now moved against still another travel website that relies almost solely on so-called user-generated content. This time the object of their scorn is an Internet service called AirlineQuality.com, which purports to print objective reviews of airlines and airports by the passengers who have allegedly used them.

Responding to a claim that these critics may have actually never visited, let alone flown on, those facilities, the prestigious Advertising Standards Authority of Great Britain has ruled that Airline Quality.com has no proof that the reviews it publishes aren't fakes. Similar allegations, of course, have been made against Trip Advisor.com, although it should be pointed out that the latter are simply allegations that haven't yet been conclusively proved one way or another.

Nevertheless, as I have earlier noted, the long-established Gannett Corporation apparently is promoting a new user-generated review site called HotelMe.com, which will require proof that a critic actually stayed at the hotel he or she has criticized or praised before that review will be published ("Verified Reviews Based on Real Stays" is its slogan). Currently, it is a matter of sharp contention as to whether TripAdvisor.com has proof of the bona fides of the people who declare that they have either loved or hated a particular hotel.

And so it goes. How many of the user-generated reviews are from actual users, and how many have been sent in by friends or competitors of the hotels or restaurants in question? One reader of this column has claimed, in a recent communication, that some 40 percent of the reviews appearing in a prominent user-generated website are "fakes" composed either at the behest of a hotel or restaurant or by its competitors.

As for me, I find it increasingly difficult to rely on the user-generated sites. Scanning the reviews of a particular property, I frequently find that some 40 or so people claim it to be one of the best they have ever patronized, while another 40 or so people claim it is the worst they have ever patronized. Which to believe? Some defenders of the user-generated sites have composed elaborate formulas by which they eliminate the best and worst extremes, and simply look at reviews by people conferring only moderate praise or blame on the property. But then, what is the utility of using the site?

Though I'll be attacked as having a self-interest in this question, I will continue to rely on the judgment of experts — experiencd journalists, in most instances — and not on the reviews of amateur and inexperienced critics. Is it best, for instance, to follow the advice of a longtime restaurant editor of a leading metropolitan newspaper — as opposed to the advice of a traveler who is passing judgment on the only restaurant they have ever used in that city? The question, in my view, answers itself.

[ Arthur Frommer is the pioneering founder of the Frommer's Travel Guide book series. He co-hosts the radio program, The Travel Show, with his travel correspondent daughter Pauline Frommer. Find more destinations online and read Arthur Frommer's blog at frommers.com. ]